JAVID IQBAL, J-Wall Muhammad son of Muhammad Ismail, aged 30 years' armed with knife, has been convicted under section 302, P. P. C. For the murder of Muhammad. Ismail, aged 30 years; and vide judgment dated 18th November, 1979 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad was sentenced to death plus fine of Rs. 5,000 or in default to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment.
He was also ordered to pay Rs. 5,000 as compensation to the heirs of the deceased. His co- accused, namely, Ali Muhammad, his brother, and Qurban Ali, his nephew both stated to be empty-handed, were given the benefit of doubt and acquitted. The appeal of the convict as well as Reference for the confirmation of death sentence awarded to him are being taken up and disposed, of together by this judgment.
2. The occurrence took place on 29-3-1977 at 7-00 p. m. In a street before the house-cum-shop of the deceased within the area of Chak No. 466/GB, at a distance of two miles from Police Station Samundri, District Faisalabad. F. I. R. Exh: P. F. Was lodged at 8-30 p. m. On the same day by Inayatullah P. W. 9, brother of the deceased, and it was recorded at the police station by Abdur Rehman S. I. P. W. 11.
3. The motive for crime, as stated in the F. I. R. Is that the deceased was a depot holder. At 3-00 p. m. On the day of occurrence i. e. Four hours before the occurrence Mst. Nawab Bibi, sister of the appellant, went to purchase Ata from the shop of the deceased. But there was an altercation between the deceased and Mst. Nawab Bibi on the rate at which the Ara was being sold. Mst.
Nawab Bibi threw the Ata on the spot, took her money back and left the place. The prosecution case is that after some time Ali Muhammad, acquitted co-accused and also brother of Mst. Nawab Bibi, came to the shop of the deceased and quarrelled with him as to why he had insulted his sister.
However, they were separated by Inayat Ullah P. W. 9 and Shaukat Ali (not produced). The deceased closed his shop and came back to his house. At about 6-00 p. m. i. p. One hour before the occurrence the appellant along with the two acquitted co-accused again came and stood in front of the house of the deceased. They started quarrelling with him and abusing him. Thereupon, again Inayat Ullah P. W. 9 and another brother of the deceased, namely, Subedar Muhammad Siddique (not produced) patched up the matter and the accused party left. However, after the passage of another hour they came again and the occurrence followed.
4. The prosecution has produced two eye-witnesses of the occurrence, namely, Inayat Ullah P. W. 9, real brother of the deceased, and Muhammad Siddique P. W. 10, an unconnected person. Noor Muhammad was cited as an eye-witness but was not produced.
5. The appellant and the acquitted co-accused were arrested on 2-4-1977 by Abdur Rehman S. 1. P.
W.
11. Nothing was recovered from the acquitted co-accused. But at the instance of the appellant blood--stained knife P. 5 was recovered and taken into possession vide memo. Exh. P. E. Dated 2nd April, 1977. The attesting witnesses are Talib Hussain P. W. 7, Zafarullah P. W. 8 and Abdur Rehman S. I. P. W.
11. According to the report of the Serologist Exh. P. K. At page 7 of the Paper Book, knife P. 5 was found to be stained with human blood.
6. The appellant, in his statement before the trial Court, admitted that an altercation took place between Mst. Nawab Bibi and the deceased over the distribution of Ata ration. They exchanged hot words and that the deceased pushed Mst. Nawab Bibi who fell down. According to the appellant thereupon Kala, his nephew, gave a blow with the sickle he was carrying in his hand, and that this took place at about 5-30 p. m. On the day of occurrence. He stated that he did not participate in the occurrence. He disowned recovery and further stated that since Kala was of tender age, the complainant-party had substituted the appellant in his place after making improvements in the prosecution version. He also stated that the incident took place at 5-30 p. m. And that the deceased received an injury at the hands of Kala and not him. He did not produce any evidence in support of his version. The acquitted co-accused stated that they had been falsely involved in this case and that it was Kala who had caused a single injury to the deceased when the deceased had pushed and insulted Mst. Nawab Bibi.
7. Dr. Ahmad Saeed P. W. 1 conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased at 8-00 a. m. On 30-3-1977 and found on his person a stab wound 1"x 1" chest cavity deep on the back of left side of chest. The injury was dangerous to life and was caused by sharp-edged pointed weapon. Death, in his opinion, was due to haemorrhage and shock caused by this injury which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Time between injury and death was within about half to 1i hours.
8. In the F. I. R. The occurrence is reported to have taken place in the following manner On the fateful day while the deceased was sitting; outside the Baithak of his house on a cot and Inayat Ullah P. W. 9 as well as Noor Muhammad (not produced) were inside the house, they heard alarm coming from the street and both of them rushed out. They witnessed that Ali Muhammad, acquitted co-accused, was holding the deceased from his head whereas Qurban Ali, acquitted co-accused, was holding him from his legs and the appellant, who was armed with a knife, gave a blow therewith on the left side of the back of the deceased. The deceased shrieked on receiving the injury and was covered with blood. Besides Inayat Ullah P. W. And Noor Muhammad, the occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Siddique P. W. 10, an unconnected person. After the occurrence many people gathered on the spot, but the appellant and his companions ran away. Inayat Ullah P.
W. And Noor Muhammad put the deceased in an injured condition on a bullock cart and took him towards the Civil Hospital, Samundri, for treatment, but he died on the way. Leaving the dead body behind at the Civil Hospital Samundri in the care of Ali Muhammad son of Suba Khan, Inayat Ullah P. W. Proceeded to lodge the report.
9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record. There is no background of previous enmity between the parties. The occurrence took place because Mst.
Nawab Bibi. Sister of the appellant, went to purchase Ata at the shop of the deceased, who was a depot holder. However, they had an altercation on the rate at which the Ata was being sold. The prosecution story is that thereupon Mst. Nawab Bibi threw the Ata on the spot, took away her money and left the scene. The motive version is not being disputed by the appellant who has stated that an altercation took. Place between his sister Mst. Nawab Bibi and the deceased over the distribution of Ata ration and that they exchanged, hot words in the course of which the deceased pushed Mst. Nawab Bibi who fell down. The prosecution version proceeds that thereafter Ali Muhammad, acquitted co-accused, came to the shop of the deceased and quarrelled with him as to why he had insulted his sister. At this stage the parties were separated by Inayat Ullah P. W. And Shaukat Ali. According to the prosecution version the deceased closed his shop at 5-00 p. m. And returned to his house. But the appellant alongwith the acquitted co-accused again came there and stood in front of the house of the deceased quarrelling with him and abusing him as he had insulted their sister. At this stage also Inayat Ullah P. W. And Subedar Muhammad Siddique pacified the parties and they are stated to have left the scene. However, after another hour they came to the spot again while the deceased was sitting outside the Baithak of his house on a cot. Again a quarrel started and in the course of the same the prosecution version is that Ali Muhammad and Qurban Ali, acquitted co-accused, had held the deceased from head and feet while the appellant gave him a knife blow at his left back on the receipt of which the deceased gave out a shriek which was heard by Inayat Ullah P. W. And Noor Muhammad who rushed to the scene of crime and witnessed the occurrence. Besides Inayat Ullah P. W., who has been produced by the prosecution as an eye-witness, Muhammad Siddique P. W. An unconnected person, had also witnessed the occurrence i.e. The appellant giving a knife blow to the deceased. So ocular testimony, in the instant case, is being corroborated by the recovery evidence in respect of the part ascribed to the appellant and is further supported by the medical evidence as well as the motive version. The defence version advanced by the appellant is not supported by any evidence on the record. It is even otherwise improbable and has been rightly rejected. After a careful perusal of the evidence on the record, we are convinced in our mind that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing its case as against the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt. In the circumstances, the conviction of the appellant under section 302, P. P. C. Was quite proper and is accordingly maintained.
As for the question of sentence, it is prosecution's - own version that the deceased had insulted Mst. Nawab Bibi, sister of the appellant; and that there was no background of previous enmity between the parties. Thus, it appears that due to the insult to the sister of the appellant, the appellant had been provoked suddenly and he caused a single injury to the deceased which resulted in his death. Consequently, this constitutes an extenuating circumstance and in our considered view the awarding of lesser penalty, in the instant case, would be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. The result is that the conviction of the appellant under section 302, P. P. C. Is maintained but his sentence is altered from death to that of imprisonment for life. The sentence of fin as well as of payment of compensation is maintained with the direction that if the fine and the amount of compensation is realized from the appellant, the entire sum should be paid as compensation to the heirs of the deceased. The Jail Authorities are directed to grant the provisions of section 382-B, Cr. P. C. At the time of the computation of sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellant. With this modification the appeal is dismissed.
The death sentence awarded to Wali Muhammad appellant is not confirmed.